Literature DB >> 23109703

Recommendations for the return of research results to study participants and guardians: a report from the Children's Oncology Group.

Conrad V Fernandez1, Kathleen Ruccione, Robert J Wells, Jay B Long, Wendy Pelletier, Mary C Hooke, Rebecca D Pentz, Robert B Noll, Justin N Baker, Maura O'Leary, Gregory Reaman, Peter C Adamson, Steven Joffe.   

Abstract

PURPOSE: The Children's Oncology Group (COG) strongly supports the widely recognized principle that research participants should be offered a summary of study results. The mechanism by which to do so in a cooperative research group setting has not been previously described.
METHODS: On the basis of a review of the available empirical and theoretic literature and on iterative, multidisciplinary discussion, a COG Return of Results Task Force (RRTF) offered detailed recommendations for the return of results to research study participants.
RESULTS: The RRTF established guidelines for the notification of research participants and/or their parents/guardians about the availability of research results, a mechanism for and timing of sharing results via registration on the COG public Web site, the scope of the research to be shared, the target audience, and a process for creating and vetting lay summaries of study results. The RRTF recognized the challenges in adequately conveying complex scientific results to audiences with varying levels of health literacy and recommended that particularly sensitive or complex results be returned using direct personal contact. The RRTF also recommended evaluation of the cost, effectiveness, and impact of sharing results.
CONCLUSION: These recommendations provide a framework for the offering and returning of results to participants. They can be used by individual investigators, multi-investigator research collaboratives, and large cooperative groups.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2012        PMID: 23109703      PMCID: PMC3518731          DOI: 10.1200/JCO.2012.45.2086

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Clin Oncol        ISSN: 0732-183X            Impact factor:   44.544


  49 in total

1.  Coverage by the news media of the benefits and risks of medications.

Authors:  R Moynihan; L Bero; D Ross-Degnan; D Henry; K Lee; J Watkins; C Mah; S B Soumerai
Journal:  N Engl J Med       Date:  2000-06-01       Impact factor: 91.245

2.  Considerations and costs of disclosing study findings to research participants.

Authors:  Conrad V Fernandez; Chris Skedgel; Charles Weijer
Journal:  CMAJ       Date:  2004-04-27       Impact factor: 8.262

3.  The fate of abstracts submitted to a cancer meeting: factors which influence presentation and subsequent publication.

Authors:  C De Bellefeuille; C A Morrison; I F Tannock
Journal:  Ann Oncol       Date:  1992-03       Impact factor: 32.976

4.  The ethics of research using biobanks: reason to question the importance attributed to informed consent.

Authors:  Klaus Hoeyer; Bert-Ove Olofsson; Tom Mjörndal; Niels Lynöe
Journal:  Arch Intern Med       Date:  2005-01-10

5.  Providing research participants with findings from completed cancer-related clinical trials: not quite as simple as it sounds.

Authors:  Maurie Markman
Journal:  Cancer       Date:  2006-04-01       Impact factor: 6.860

6.  Informing research participants of research results: analysis of Canadian university based research ethics board policies.

Authors:  S D Macneil; C V Fernandez
Journal:  J Med Ethics       Date:  2006-01       Impact factor: 2.903

7.  Offering to return results to research participants: attitudes and needs of principal investigators in the Children's Oncology Group.

Authors:  Conrad V Fernandez; Eric Kodish; Susan Shurin; Charles Weijer
Journal:  J Pediatr Hematol Oncol       Date:  2003-09       Impact factor: 1.289

8.  Comparison of the informed consent process for randomized clinical trials in pediatric and adult oncology.

Authors:  Christian M Simon; Laura A Siminoff; Eric D Kodish; Christopher Burant
Journal:  J Clin Oncol       Date:  2004-07-01       Impact factor: 44.544

9.  Impact on survivors of retinoblastoma when informed of study results on risk of second cancers.

Authors:  Charlene J Schulz; Mary P Riddle; Heiddis B Valdimirsdottir; David H Abramson; Charles A Sklar
Journal:  Med Pediatr Oncol       Date:  2003-07

10.  Public access and use of health research: an exploratory study of the National Institutes of Health (NIH) Public Access Policy using interviews and surveys of health personnel.

Authors:  Jamie O'Keeffe; John Willinsky; Lauren Maggio
Journal:  J Med Internet Res       Date:  2011-11-21       Impact factor: 5.428

View more
  10 in total

1.  Proteinuria is a late-onset adverse event in patients treated with cabozantinib.

Authors:  V Cappagli; D Moriconi; A G Bonadio; D Giannese; Gaetano La Manna; M Francesca Egidi; G Comai; G Vischini; V Bottici; R Elisei; D Viola
Journal:  J Endocrinol Invest       Date:  2020-05-03       Impact factor: 4.256

2.  Health research participants' preferences for receiving research results.

Authors:  Christopher R Long; M Kathryn Stewart; Thomas V Cunningham; T Scott Warmack; Pearl A McElfish
Journal:  Clin Trials       Date:  2016-08-24       Impact factor: 2.486

3.  Patient, caregiver and physician perspectives on participating in a thoracic rapid tissue donation program.

Authors:  Gwendolyn P Quinn; Rebecca D Pentz; Teresita Muñoz-Antonia; Theresa A Boyle; Matthew B Schabath; Christie L Pratt; Andrea Shaffer; Luisa F Duarte; Meghan Bowman-Curci; Scott J Antonia; Alberto A Chiappori; Benjamin C Creelan; Jhanelle E Gray; Charles C Williams; Eric B Haura
Journal:  Patient Educ Couns       Date:  2017-11-28

4.  Returning research results: caregivers' reactions following computerized cognitive training among childhood cancer survivors.

Authors:  Sarah M Scott; Jason M Ashford; Kellie N Clark; Karen Martin-Elbahesh; Heather M Conklin
Journal:  Neurooncol Pract       Date:  2017-11-19

5.  Returning aggregate results of clinical trials: Empirical data of patient preferences.

Authors:  Carmen E Aldinger; Jennifer Ligibel; Im Hee Shin; John W Denninger; Barbara E Bierer
Journal:  J Clin Transl Sci       Date:  2018-12

6.  How can we get Iraq- and Afghanistan-deployed US Veterans to participate in health-related research? Findings from a national focus group study.

Authors:  Alyson J Littman; Gala True; Emily Ashmore; Tracy Wellens; Nicholas L Smith
Journal:  BMC Med Res Methodol       Date:  2018-08-29       Impact factor: 4.615

7.  Willingness to Participate in a National Precision Medicine Cohort: Attitudes of Chronic Kidney Disease Patients at a Cleveland Public Hospital.

Authors:  Jessica N Cooke Bailey; Dana C Crawford; Aaron Goldenberg; Anne Slaven; Julie Pencak; Marleen Schachere; William S Bush; John R Sedor; John F O'Toole
Journal:  J Pers Med       Date:  2018-06-26

8.  The effects of releasing early results from ongoing clinical trials.

Authors:  Steffen Ventz; Sergio Bacallado; Rifaquat Rahman; Sara Tolaney; Jonathan D Schoenfeld; Brian M Alexander; Lorenzo Trippa
Journal:  Nat Commun       Date:  2021-02-05       Impact factor: 14.919

9.  Returning individual research results for genome sequences of pancreatic cancer.

Authors:  Amber L Johns; David K Miller; Skye H Simpson; Anthony J Gill; Karin S Kassahn; Jeremy L Humphris; Jaswinder S Samra; Katherine Tucker; Lesley Andrews; David K Chang; Nicola Waddell; Marina Pajic; John V Pearson; Sean M Grimmond; Andrew V Biankin; Nikolajs Zeps
Journal:  Genome Med       Date:  2014-05-29       Impact factor: 11.117

10.  Health research participants are not receiving research results: a collaborative solution is needed.

Authors:  Christopher R Long; M Kathryn Stewart; Pearl A McElfish
Journal:  Trials       Date:  2017-10-02       Impact factor: 2.279

  10 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.